4 ms·

Ahh yes, all those tweets the FBI reported that Matt forgot to tell you were straight up revenge porn. I really wonder why they were deleted! If only he could h

Ahh yes, all those tweets the FBI reported that Matt forgot to tell you were straight up revenge porn. I really wonder why they were deleted! If only he could have found out using, like, the Web Archive, as many others did afterwards. (It was the Trump government FBI, by the way. In case your timeline is a bit mixed up?)

akira2501 4y ago
[flagged]
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- turtleyacht 4y ago
  Even if flagged, isn't that just a -1? I've seen grey posts return to dark after an upvote before.
  - flagsrule 4y ago
    Well it's dead now and it was a very reasonable post. This site is full of bias.
- creato 4y ago
  > You people are very quick to muddy the waters here. Funny, I’d say it was people that can’t seem to cite any evidence without dick pics that are “muddying the waters”. I’ve read these twitter files posts from Taibbi and Weiss. It’s all insinuations based on contact between government agencies and twitter. The actual content being discussed is not interesting. The biggest red flag this is all raising for me is why FBI agents are sitting around searching for small time election misinformation like talking about voting a day late. Is there nothing higher priority to work on? And how has twitter not automated finding such basic misinformation?
  - Jarwain 4y ago
    Mismatch in incentives and priority? My impression is that the FBI only has a team or two dedicated to these searches. However, it is much closer to their mandate to keep an eye out on election misinformation and otherwise "protect our democracy"
Ygg2 4y ago
> were straight up revenge porn. Citation needed. Even Wikipedia lists it as an abandoned laptop that was trawled for data. Trash as far as I know is legitimate object of search (e.g. police does it). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hunter_Biden_laptop_controversy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hunter_Biden_laptop_controvers...
- ajross 4y ago
  The smoking gun email in the "Part 1" Twitter Files thread from Taibbi was a request from the Biden Campaign to look at a list of otherwise-undescribed-and-since-removed tweets. This was strongly implied to be a request for censorship of the laptop story. Then someone found an archived copy of all but one of the tweets, and they all turned out to be pictures of Hunter Biden's penis.
  - Ygg2 4y ago
    > Then someone found an archived copy of all but one of the tweets, and they all turned out to be pictures of Hunter Biden's penis. Yes, he left his images on laptop. That's not revenge porn, as far as I know. > The smoking gun email in the "Part 1" Twitter Files Don't quote me on that, but from my memory not only were links to Hunter deleted, but so were discussions of it from even reputable journalist. I think it was a Washington Post that discussed Hunter's laptop, and it got buried or deleted. That's only Part 1. They also marked Trump tweets as fake, even though they found some exonerating information and vice versa. Plus the weekly meetings with FBI/OGA (alias for CIA), around misinformation spreading tweets, etc. You basically have a government agency labeling stuff as misinformation for deranking/deletion. If that doesn't raise any First Amendment issues, I'm not sure what will? Capturing journalist and keeping them in horrible conditions? Water torture and organ transfer of said journalists?
    - NickNameNick 4y ago
      Re-distributing intimate material without the subjects permission is pretty much the definition of revenge porn.

akira2501 4y ago

[flagged]

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
turtleyacht 4y ago
Even if flagged, isn't that just a -1? I've seen grey posts return to dark after an upvote before.
- flagsrule 4y ago
  Well it's dead now and it was a very reasonable post. This site is full of bias.
creato 4y ago
> You people are very quick to muddy the waters here. Funny, I’d say it was people that can’t seem to cite any evidence without dick pics that are “muddying the waters”. I’ve read these twitter files posts from Taibbi and Weiss. It’s all insinuations based on contact between government agencies and twitter. The actual content being discussed is not interesting. The biggest red flag this is all raising for me is why FBI agents are sitting around searching for small time election misinformation like talking about voting a day late. Is there nothing higher priority to work on? And how has twitter not automated finding such basic misinformation?
- Jarwain 4y ago
  Mismatch in incentives and priority? My impression is that the FBI only has a team or two dedicated to these searches. However, it is much closer to their mandate to keep an eye out on election misinformation and otherwise "protect our democracy"

Ygg2 4y ago

> were straight up revenge porn. Citation needed. Even Wikipedia lists it as an abandoned laptop that was trawled for data. Trash as far as I know is legitimate object of search (e.g. police does it). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hunter_Biden_laptop_controversy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hunter_Biden_laptop_controvers...

ajross 4y ago
The smoking gun email in the "Part 1" Twitter Files thread from Taibbi was a request from the Biden Campaign to look at a list of otherwise-undescribed-and-since-removed tweets. This was strongly implied to be a request for censorship of the laptop story. Then someone found an archived copy of all but one of the tweets, and they all turned out to be pictures of Hunter Biden's penis.
- Ygg2 4y ago
  > Then someone found an archived copy of all but one of the tweets, and they all turned out to be pictures of Hunter Biden's penis. Yes, he left his images on laptop. That's not revenge porn, as far as I know. > The smoking gun email in the "Part 1" Twitter Files Don't quote me on that, but from my memory not only were links to Hunter deleted, but so were discussions of it from even reputable journalist. I think it was a Washington Post that discussed Hunter's laptop, and it got buried or deleted. That's only Part 1. They also marked Trump tweets as fake, even though they found some exonerating information and vice versa. Plus the weekly meetings with FBI/OGA (alias for CIA), around misinformation spreading tweets, etc. You basically have a government agency labeling stuff as misinformation for deranking/deletion. If that doesn't raise any First Amendment issues, I'm not sure what will? Capturing journalist and keeping them in horrible conditions? Water torture and organ transfer of said journalists?
  - NickNameNick 4y ago
    Re-distributing intimate material without the subjects permission is pretty much the definition of revenge porn.